Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

The blueprint for howCambridge Analyticaclaimed to have won the White House for Donald Trump by using Google, Snapchat, Twitter, Facebook and YouTube is revealed for the first time in an internal company document obtained by the Guardian.

The 27-page presentation was produced by the Cambridge Analytica officials who worked most closely on Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign.

A former employee explained to the Guardian how it details the techniques used by the Trump campaign to micro-target US voters with carefully tailored messages about the Republican nominee across digital channels.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

@dylan winter used to. I wonder if his views changed? He shut me down a few months ago when I suggested his countrymen were duped as easily as American trailer trash.

The similarities in the campaigns are very similar in many ways. Appeal to the disenfranchised, throw the whole blame on foreign interference, add the immigration and social issue....... and just stand back and watch.

Actually, we were in the UK at the time of the vote. Lots of folks were completely disillusioned with the promise of the EU. The working people mostly favored exit. Like fishermen who were quotaed out of fishing their own waters and watching the Spanish move in to fish their waters. The farmers weren't too happy with the common agricultural policy either.

Another part of it was immigration. The UK had gone through a couple of decades assimilating folks from the commonwealth. Even some Australians. Then the EU started telling them who else they had to let enter.

Up to 500 officers would need to be recruited and decommissioned police stations reopened to protect the post-Brexit border on the island of Ireland.

Rank and file police warned on Thursday that the 6,621-member Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) was not adequately staffed to enforce even a soft frontier after the UK exits the European Union next year.

The port of Dover has warned there will be serious traffic congestion once a week in the town and on surrounding routes unless the government achieves a Brexit deal involving frictionless trade.

Richard Christian, the port’s head of policy, said there would be “regular gridlock” in Kent in the event of a hard Brexit, and disruption to freight traffic on ferries and Eurotunnel services would have a profound impact on Britain’s economy.

No it’s too late for this to turn back now. Too many belligerent people who can’t admit they may have been misled. It was a pack of lies from the start.

And yes, the biggest group that voted in were the older generation that has mostly already retired and are dumping this on their kids who grew up as European citizens. It was a point of discussion that the vote should have been restricted to a relevant age group, under 60 would have been an idea.

No it’s too late for this to turn back now. Too many belligerent people who can’t admit they may have been misled. It was a pack of lies from the start.

And yes, the biggest group that voted in were the older generation that has mostly already retired and are dumping this on their kids who grew up as European citizens. It was a point of discussion that the vote should have been restricted to a relevant age group, under 60 would have been an idea.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

The blueprint for howCambridge Analyticaclaimed to have won the White House for Donald Trump by using Google, Snapchat, Twitter, Facebook and YouTube is revealed for the first time in an internal company document obtained by the Guardian.

The 27-page presentation was produced by the Cambridge Analytica officials who worked most closely on Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign.

A former employee explained to the Guardian how it details the techniques used by the Trump campaign to micro-target US voters with carefully tailored messages about the Republican nominee across digital channels.

I've seen a couple of pics of Rainbow Bernie now, but have never encountered such a voter.

I think the whole idea that a few Tweets determined our election is just an excuse by those who can't believe they were so fucking stupid that they nominated perhaps the only TeamD woman who could not do anything with "grab 'em by the pussy." Admitting you've been that stupid is hard.

....but I’d expect you to read and believe the crap they print, are you a regular reader?

I read a lot of brit news. I see a lot of other countries getting farty over Brussels sproutings. That's one reason that the EU is demanding harsh terms. They need to punish britain or more countries will be considering leaving.

The date is set, neither side has a mechanism to change it. That's a state change that needs to be planned for by both sides instead of seeing how much they can get from the other on the change date.

But, I expect you to attack a source rather than think and prepare. Have you considered moving to Puerto Rico or Haiti?

I've seen a couple of pics of Rainbow Bernie now, but have never encountered such a voter.

I think the whole idea that a few Tweets determined our election is just an excuse by those who can't believe they were so fucking stupid that they nominated perhaps the only TeamD woman who could not do anything with "grab 'em by the pussy." Admitting you've been that stupid is hard.

Was discussing this at work. People are too busy and too smart to do any investigation of anything. They do want someone to give them cliff notes and a conclusion. Its like the world is a fast food store and they want everything prepackaged and served at the correct temperature because its just easier. Stupid is the new fat.

Ps. News feeds are the tip of the iceberg. The real volume is in the unmentioned likes, shares and reading what a friend has on their page, not necessarily what gets clicked on. Of course, if its on a friend's page, it must be legit, right?

1

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Ps. News feeds are the tip of the iceberg. The real volume is in the unmentioned likes, shares and reading what a friend has on their page, not necessarily what gets clicked on. Of course, if its on a friend's page, it must be legit, right?

I think it depends on the friend. I mostly pay attention to the ones posting about boating, but as for the political ones, it's about like here. Some are reliably TeamR, some TeamD, neither particularly persuasive to each other or me. So I don't think all the noise really changed much.

Except the noise coming from Trump himself, which drowned out everything else.

I've seen a couple of pics of Rainbow Bernie now, but have never encountered such a voter.

I think the whole idea that a few Tweets determined our election is just an excuse by those who can't believe they were so fucking stupid that they nominated perhaps the only TeamD woman who could not do anything with "grab 'em by the pussy." Admitting you've been that stupid is hard.

My decision to never vote for Hillary was made back in 2008. Russians had nothing to do with that. Trump is a bullshit artist and con-man, he never was a consideration. Both candidates were immensely polarizing figures, I rather doubt there was a huge number of voters who couldn't make up their minds. Also, although there's an increasing amount of evidence of foreign involvement in social media, I'm with Tom. The 'Russian' efforts on social media were already targeting likely voters, and it paled in comparison to the $2billion plus spent on MSM advertising.

Mueller is pretty tight-lipped...all we really know coming out of his investigation is the significant number of Russian contacts most of Trump's inner circle and he himself had. Don't know to what extent they colluded or coordinated, at least until Mueller releases his report. The Guardian has been doing good coverage on what appears to be Russian influence on the Brexit vote. Those same people were 'guests' of the Trump Campaign. So there is some smoke. But all I can be sure of is that Russian operatives did attempt to influence the US election. To what degree they were successful, IDK. But the only reason the election was close enough to influence is because Clinton was such a crappy candidate and ran a crappy campaign.

1

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I think it depends on the friend. I mostly pay attention to the ones posting about boating, but as for the political ones, it's about like here. Some are reliably TeamR, some TeamD, neither particularly persuasive to each other or me. So I don't think all the noise really changed much.

Except the noise coming from Trump himself, which drowned out everything else.

I think it has absolutely nothing to do with the friend. Their business is not my business.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

My decision to never vote for Hillary was made back in 2008. Russians had nothing to do with that. Trump is a bullshit artist and con-man, he never was a consideration. Both candidates were immensely polarizing figures, I rather doubt there was a huge number of voters who couldn't make up their minds. Also, although there's an increasing amount of evidence of foreign involvement in social media, I'm with Tom. The 'Russian' efforts on social media were already targeting likely voters, and it paled in comparison to the $2billion plus spent on MSM advertising.

Mueller is pretty tight-lipped...all we really know coming out of his investigation is the significant number of Russian contacts most of Trump's inner circle and he himself had. Don't know to what extent they colluded or coordinated, at least until Mueller releases his report. The Guardian has been doing good coverage on what appears to be Russian influence on the Brexit vote. Those same people were 'guests' of the Trump Campaign. So there is some smoke. But all I can be sure of is that Russian operatives did attempt to influence the US election. To what degree they were successful, IDK. But the only reason the election was close enough to influence is because Clinton was such a crappy candidate and ran a crappy campaign.

Clinton may be unlikable as a person (though I doubt anyone here actually knows her personally), but she was far from a crappy candidate.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Clinton may be unlikable as a person (though I doubt anyone here actually knows her personally), but she was far from a crappy candidate.

She lost to Donald fuckingTrump. The two lowest polling major candidates in polling history. Crappy candidate. She never could even articulate why she was running for president. Flip-flopped on issues, depending which way the wind blew (her 'private positions' vs her 'public positions'). Never took a leading role in an issue. In both primary campaigns, she started out as a heavy favorite against relative unknowns, and saw a persistent bleeding of support.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

The electorate 'loved' her so much they stayed home. It was just a vanity campaign...she wanted her precious...voters saw through it.

The electorate never loved her. Anyone who believed that it did, was wrong. Those that stayed home are not relevant. The people who voted are what mattered. They were the ones who made the decision.

As for her precious, what a load of crap.

From my position, the 2 most effective administrations of the last 40 years were the Clinton and Obama administrations. Only one candidate in the last election had real experience with those 2 administrations. When it comes to the most qualified person, not liking an individual shouldn't trump their actual experience.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

The electorate never loved her. Anyone who believed that it did, was wrong. Those that stayed home are not relevant. The people who voted are what mattered. They were the ones who made the decision.

As for her precious, what a load of crap.

From my position, the 2 most effective administrations of the last 40 years were the Clinton and Obama administrations. Only one candidate in the last election had real experience with those 2 administrations. When it comes to the most qualified person, not liking an individual shouldn't trump their actual experience.

I disagree with most of your statements, but I'm not going to put an effort into debating someone's sock.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

My decision to never vote for Hillary was made back in 2008. Russians had nothing to do with that. Trump is a bullshit artist and con-man, he never was a consideration. Both candidates were immensely polarizing figures, I rather doubt there was a huge number of voters who couldn't make up their minds. Also, although there's an increasing amount of evidence of foreign involvement in social media, I'm with Tom. The 'Russian' efforts on social media were already targeting likely voters, and it paled in comparison to the $2billion plus spent on MSM advertising.

Mueller is pretty tight-lipped...all we really know coming out of his investigation is the significant number of Russian contacts most of Trump's inner circle and he himself had. Don't know to what extent they colluded or coordinated, at least until Mueller releases his report. The Guardian has been doing good coverage on what appears to be Russian influence on the Brexit vote. Those same people were 'guests' of the Trump Campaign. So there is some smoke. But all I can be sure of is that Russian operatives did attempt to influence the US election. To what degree they were successful, IDK. But the only reason the election was close enough to influence is because Clinton was such a crappy candidate and ran a crappy campaign.

This sounds even dumber than usual from me, but what I don;t understand is why?

The cold war is supposedly over, what do the russians have to gain by this campaign of meddling?

I get that all countries have their preferences in the leadership of other countries for economic and ideological reasons, but I kind of assumed that this spy V spy thing with the west V Russia was over.

Wht is Putin doing this with the EU and the USA...just becaused he can? or does he really have more sinister world domination kind of motives?

And also..has the west still been trying to cripple russia over the last 30 years since the break up of the USSR?

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I can only speculate. 1) Nationalism. 2) Economics. 3) National Security.

Russia supplies most of the natural gas to Europe, and a good bit of the oil. Their bargaining position is enhanced if western military and economic alliances are weakened, namely NATO and EU. Divide and conquer, so to speak. So any trouble they can stir up helps them. Also, when the SU broke up there was some sort of vague promise made to them not to move NATO into the former Soviet countries. That's kind of been broken, and Russia would like to have that buffer zone back. That's understandable, since they've been invaded by France and Germany in the past, and the US, British, and French were interfering in the Russian Civil War following WW1. And I think Putin is similar to Trump in that he likes creating chaos and throwing his weight around. He's gotten sanctions slapped on him for that, and he wants revenge. Also like Trump, Putin is very vengeful.

2

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Not bad Koch, and with working together with Iran (and Iraq as its under Iranian influence) and Turkey they have a strong regional influence.
Russia packed in between Eu and China feels everything as a threat.

Brexit, UK will maybe be a dumping ground for refugees, as their laws are very friendly for refugees. The Eu will not help any more to stop the flow to the UK. Maybe they will even facilitate it. The UK has to invest heavily in customs and coast guard to get it up to spec.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I read a lot of brit news. I see a lot of other countries getting farty over Brussels sproutings. That's one reason that the EU is demanding harsh terms. They need to punish britain or more countries will be considering leaving.

The date is set, neither side has a mechanism to change it. That's a state change that needs to be planned for by both sides instead of seeing how much they can get from the other on the change date.

But, I expect you to attack a source rather than think and prepare. Have you considered moving to Puerto Rico or Haiti?

The date may well be set, as to how much is in place by that date is anybody's guess, and a guess is all that's available as neither side really understands whats involved in the process.

That's the biggest issue with the whole situation, people voted to leave with absolutely no idea what was involved. And yes, the UK will be punished in one way or another.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

My decision to never vote for Hillary was made back in 2008. Russians had nothing to do with that. Trump is a bullshit artist and con-man, he never was a consideration. Both candidates were immensely polarizing figures, I rather doubt there was a huge number of voters who couldn't make up their minds. Also, although there's an increasing amount of evidence of foreign involvement in social media, I'm with Tom. The 'Russian' efforts on social media were already targeting likely voters, and it paled in comparison to the $2billion plus spent on MSM advertising.

Mueller is pretty tight-lipped...all we really know coming out of his investigation is the significant number of Russian contacts most of Trump's inner circle and he himself had. Don't know to what extent they colluded or coordinated, at least until Mueller releases his report. The Guardian has been doing good coverage on what appears to be Russian influence on the Brexit vote. Those same people were 'guests' of the Trump Campaign. So there is some smoke. But all I can be sure of is that Russian operatives did attempt to influence the US election. To what degree they were successful, IDK. But the only reason the election was close enough to influence is because Clinton was such a crappy candidate and ran a crappy campaign.

Which is very similar to the whole Brexit saga, one side lied about money and immigration issues, the other side failed dismally to explain the real issues that arise from a split.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

This sounds even dumber than usual from me, but what I don;t understand is why?

The cold war is supposedly over, what do the russians have to gain by this campaign of meddling?

I get that all countries have their preferences in the leadership of other countries for economic and ideological reasons, but I kind of assumed that this spy V spy thing with the west V Russia was over.

Wht is Putin doing this with the EU and the USA...just becaused he can? or does he really have more sinister world domination kind of motives?

And also..has the west still been trying to cripple russia over the last 30 years since the break up of the USSR?

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Not bad Koch, and with working together with Iran (and Iraq as its under Iranian influence) and Turkey they have a strong regional influence.
Russia packed in between Eu and China feels everything as a threat.

Brexit, UK will maybe be a dumping ground for refugees, as their laws are very friendly for refugees. The Eu will not help any more to stop the flow to the UK. Maybe they will even facilitate it. The UK has to invest heavily in customs and coast guard to get it up to spec.

The so-called immigration issue was just another simple pandering to hook the gullible ones into a knee-jerk reaction of voting for Brexit, nobody really mentioned about how we would deal it, or the whole border issue that's quickly looming on the horizon.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

The date may well be set, as to how much is in place by that date is anybody's guess, and a guess is all that's available as neither side really understands whats involved in the process.

That's the biggest issue with the whole situation, people voted to leave with absolutely no idea what was involved. And yes, the UK will be punished in one way or another.

Exactly the case. The engagement with Europe has never had wide popular support within the country.

Britain became a part of the EEC in 1973. There was a referendum on whether to remain in the EEC in 1975 and the vote was to stay or not. There was never a referendum as to entry.

At the time there was nowhere near the level of control of national affairs from Brussels as there is today. It was an economic, not political union. For an example, look at the history of EU agricultural or immigration policies.

Once the refendum on Brexit was completed, the political efforts in the UK and EU should have been concentrated on preparing for the state change which will occur in March of 2019. They are not doing that and the problem is theirs.

Right now it appears that both UK parties have their own internal splits and cannot find any accommodation for the others views and they can't even seem to be willing to cross party lines where internal factions agree with points from the opposing party.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Exactly the case. The engagement with Europe has never had wide popular support within the country.

Britain became a part of the EEC in 1973. There was a referendum on whether to remain in the EEC in 1975 and the vote was to stay or not. There was never a referendum as to entry.

At the time there was nowhere near the level of control of national affairs from Brussels as there is today. It was an economic, not political union. For an example, look at the history of EU agricultural or immigration policies.

Once the refendum on Brexit was completed, the political efforts in the UK and EU should have been concentrated on preparing for the state change which will occur in March of 2019. They are not doing that and the problem is theirs.

Right now it appears that both UK parties have their own internal splits and cannot find any accommodation for the others views and they can't even seem to be willing to cross party lines where internal factions agree with points from the opposing party.

Agreed on all points, it morphed from an economic arrangement to a political one. The UK would have been far better to have stopped the insidious creep on some fronts from within the EU. Walking out the door like a spoilt brat isn't going to help the negotiations, especially as you pointed out, neither side can figure out where they really stand. The blind leading the blind.

But i think we are about to realise that it may have been a case of 'better the devil you know'

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

EU, still an economic arrangement, now trying to be a political one for a few decades, but it does not progress well. At this moment the UK was a good partner against to much political stuff. They walked away from the fight,.
The UK always had a special deal with the EU, was always a trouble child (but a good partner for the Dutch to stop a few things).
It was a stupid situation, for 3/4 in Eu, 1/4 out.

The blind leading the blind comment.

Uk wanted out, so had to come up with a plan to do it gentle or face a normal, you wanted out you are out reaction.
UK was not very productive with plans. It is not up to the EU to come with plans for an independent country...

Share on other sites

This sounds even dumber than usual from me, but what I don;t understand is why?

The cold war is supposedly over, what do the russians have to gain by this campaign of meddling?

I get that all countries have their preferences in the leadership of other countries for economic and ideological reasons, but I kind of assumed that this spy V spy thing with the west V Russia was over.

Wht is Putin doing this with the EU and the USA...just becaused he can? or does he really have more sinister world domination kind of motives?

And also..has the west still been trying to cripple russia over the last 30 years since the break up of the USSR?

Putin and Trump share a similar view on winning. If the competition loses, he must be winning. Russia is primarily a military power and fossil fuel producer. Instead of trying to compete in other areas, it’s easier to cripple the EU and disrupt the US. We hurt Russia with sanctions after their invasion of Crimea. Now our new President gets us to impose sanctions on ourself with a trade war against the world. Putin stays relevant as a major power this way, while the EU fragments and we hopefully injure China’s economy as well as our own with our California Blitz.

1

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

EU, still an economic arrangement, now trying to be a political one for a few decades, but it does not progress well. At this moment the UK was a good partner against to much political stuff. They walked away from the fight,.
The UK always had a special deal with the EU, was always a trouble child (but a good partner for the Dutch to stop a few things).
It was a stupid situation, for 3/4 in Eu, 1/4 out.

The blind leading the blind comment.

Uk wanted out, so had to come up with a plan to do it gentle or face a normal, you wanted out you are out reaction.
UK was not very productive with plans. It is not up to the EU to come with plans for an independent country...

Well, they have an effect on everyone's economy but I think they expanded the Euro zone a bit too quickly. Now they have a few problem children like Greece, Spain and Italy. That weakens the Euro and the bonds between nations.

As long as nobody whacks an archduke we may still have peace in Europe but I don't think it's guaranteed.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Putin and Trump share a similar view on winning. If the competition loses, he must be winning. Russia is primarily a military power and fossil fuel producer. Instead of trying to compete in other areas, it’s easier to cripple the EU and disrupt the US. We hurt Russia with sanctions after their invasion of Crimea. Now our new President gets us to impose sanctions on ourself with a trade war against the world. Putin stays relevant as a major power this way, while the EU fragments and we hopefully injure China’s economy as well as our own with our California Blitz.

That's really reaching.

Tariffs are a consumption tax on US citizens intended to encourage internal consumption.

Share on other sites

I can only speculate. 1) Nationalism. 2) Economics. 3) National Security.

Russia supplies most of the natural gas to Europe, and a good bit of the oil. Their bargaining position is enhanced if western military and economic alliances are weakened, namely NATO and EU. Divide and conquer, so to speak. So any trouble they can stir up helps them. Also, when the SU broke up there was some sort of vague promise made to them not to move NATO into the former Soviet countries. That's kind of been broken, and Russia would like to have that buffer zone back. That's understandable, since they've been invaded by France and Germany in the past, and the US, British, and French were interfering in the Russian Civil War following WW1. And I think Putin is similar to Trump in that he likes creating chaos and throwing his weight around. He's gotten sanctions slapped on him for that, and he wants revenge. Also like Trump, Putin is very vengeful.

7 hours ago, LeoV said:

Not bad Koch, and with working together with Iran (and Iraq as its under Iranian influence) and Turkey they have a strong regional influence.
Russia packed in between Eu and China feels everything as a threat.

Brexit, UK will maybe be a dumping ground for refugees, as their laws are very friendly for refugees. The Eu will not help any more to stop the flow to the UK. Maybe they will even facilitate it. The UK has to invest heavily in customs and coast guard to get it up to spec.

Thanks to all, that put things in perspective and jogged my memory a bit.

Though I took european 19C revolutionary history as part of my VCE, its a long time ago and I'd forgotten that Russia has always been a scary big block of bears up there..thanks.

It still seems strange in these modern times that modern countries still hang on to these traditional enmities..I supose we dont really suspect places like india and china with this sort of 19th sabotage because they've never had the same superpower status..just lots of people.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

EU, still an economic arrangement, now trying to be a political one for a few decades, but it does not progress well. At this moment the UK was a good partner against to much political stuff. They walked away from the fight,.
The UK always had a special deal with the EU, was always a trouble child (but a good partner for the Dutch to stop a few things).
It was a stupid situation, for 3/4 in Eu, 1/4 out.

The blind leading the blind comment.

Uk wanted out, so had to come up with a plan to do it gentle or face a normal, you wanted out you are out reaction.
UK was not very productive with plans. It is not up to the EU to come with plans for an independent country...

Agreed on all points as well, it’s the way it was presented to the voters that’s the issue. And yes, we subsequently fucked around for a year with a general election and the lazy fuckers having a long summer holiday, the UK deserves to get its arse kicked for being so fucking lazy, belligerent and not working on an agreement from day 1

Complete apathy until it was too late by the remainers, who just believed it never be voted for. Then the UKIP, pro Brexit group campaigning and pursuing it with a lot of scare-mongering and no real figures to back up the argument.

With what seems to be really obvious ties between both the US election and pro-Brexit.

Russia

Cambridge Analytica

Arron Banks

Wikileaks

Farage and Trumps relationship

etc, etc.

Just look at the picture at the top of the thread!!

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

But how will it end... no one can tell. Maybe the UK will be a bit poorer ( as long as its only a bit, who cares). It will be harder to work in the EU, as there will be paperwork.
The pensioners will get it a bit tougher if they live in the Eu. Think taxes, paperwork and more expensive health care.
Trade to EU will be make the products more expensive as paperwork and tax will increase cost. Same for import.

Politicians will get it tougher too, they can not blame the EU for everything that goes wrong. They would have to work harder to make laws.

And today it is two years ago the referendum was held.

1

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Agreed on all points, it morphed from an economic arrangement to a political one. The UK would have been far better to have stopped the insidious creep on some fronts from within the EU. Walking out the door like a spoilt brat isn't going to help the negotiations, especially as you pointed out, neither side can figure out where they really stand. The blind leading the blind.

But i think we are about to realise that it may have been a case of 'better the devil you know'

Definitely better the devil you know in this case. We have been royally f*cked by the older generation (luckily my folks are smart!) and the people against immigrants who are in for quite a shock when they find out immigration will actually continue. My blood boils every time I see one of the latest tabloid headlines.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

But how will it end... no one can tell. Maybe the UK will be a bit poorer ( as long as its only a bit, who cares). It will be harder to work in the EU, as there will be paperwork.
The pensioners will get it a bit tougher if they live in the Eu. Think taxes, paperwork and more expensive health care.
Trade to EU will be make the products more expensive as paperwork and tax will increase cost. Same for import.

Politicians will get it tougher too, they can not blame the EU for everything that goes wrong. They would have to work harder to make laws.

And today it is two years ago the referendum was held.

Hard to see any advantages in this deal isn’t it

2 years today??

Now there’s a depressing thought for the day!! I’m going sit in the sun, drink coffee and eat croissants for a late breakfast. How very European of me.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

In all the talks between Eu and UK its al about borders, citizenship and money. Nothing yet about future trade etc. Looks like the hardliners are going to win by just doing nothing.

To make your day worse; at 11pm on March 29 2019, the UK is scheduled to leave the bloc. 11 months to go.

There are companies in Europe that want to trade with the UK and vice versa. Trade will happen. There are too many civil contracts that will not be voided with a political change. The terms might suffer but folks in the UK will still be able to buy BMWs and folks in the EU will still be able to buy Jags.

The BBC has a program called Question Time. It's a panel program with a moderator, an MP from each party usually a cabinet member and their shadow, a local MP and a couple of Journalists. The audience gets to ask the questions, the responses are remarkably polite but intense.

The politicians are almost an embarrassment in most cases. Neither Dimbleby or the audience lets them spin too long saying nothing.

The general feeling from the audience comes across as "Well, we are getting out regardless, why don't you idiots pull your socks up and get to work".

Some of them are calling for a 'referendum on the deal". I don't see that as anything but silly. The event will occur regardless of the "deal". The UK would be better off spending the next 11 month preparing for the state change and disregard the idiocy of parliament political manoeuvering .

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

There are too many civil contracts that will not be voided with a political change.﻿ The terms might suffer but folks in the UK will still be able to buy BMWs and folks in the EU will still be able to buy Jags

google BMW plants in the UK and see your mistake. Many civil contracts will be not renewed.

Trade will happen, but products will get more expensive. Imports and exports. See the problem ? After decades of internal Eu market each country specialized in a few sectors.
So they need imports.

Exports:
products:
Motor vehicles and parts is the largest by value of exports: the UK exported £18 billion of motor vehicles (and trailers) to the EU in 2016. The next largest product group exported to the EU is chemicals and chemical products, £15 billion in 2016

See the problem, its the non UK specific brands building cars there, like Nissan Toyota and BMW, that can move to Poland and Romania etc. Its not that we all drive in Jags, Landrovers or Rolls Royce...
For the chemicals, Bayer, DSM and similar consorts are laughing... so easy to tax, very strict regulated (lots of paperwork if coming from out of the EU).

Services: Uk are big in the Financial sector, easy to move to mainland Eu. There is a small problem that you need a license to trade in the Eu, the moment UK steps out they have to get that license again. If they get it at all, which is a big if.

Zhe Germans and French and Luxembourg are happy to wait and pick up this business.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

It's been an Indian company for almost a decade now - they could just move production to India or China where they have plants. Rolls-Royce are BMWs, Bently VWs. The largest "independent" UK car company left is probably Morgan Motorcars.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

google BMW plants in the UK and see your mistake. Many civil contracts will be not renewed.

Trade will happen, but products will get more expensive. Imports and exports. See the problem ? After decades of internal Eu market each country specialized in a few sectors.
So they need imports.

Exports:
products:
Motor vehicles and parts is the largest by value of exports: the UK exported £18 billion of motor vehicles (and trailers) to the EU in 2016. The next largest product group exported to the EU is chemicals and chemical products, £15 billion in 2016

See the problem, its the non UK specific brands building cars there, like Nissan Toyota and BMW, that can move to Poland and Romania etc. Its not that we all drive in Jags, Landrovers or Rolls Royce...
For the chemicals, Bayer, DSM and similar consorts are laughing... so easy to tax, very strict regulated (lots of paperwork if coming from out of the EU).

Services: Uk are big in the Financial sector, easy to move to mainland Eu. There is a small problem that you need a license to trade in the Eu, the moment UK steps out they have to get that license again. If they get it at all, which is a big if.

Zhe Germans and French and Luxembourg are happy to wait and pick up this business.

I have no intention of analyzing the UK economy as it is now. That's a job for the UK. I'm not saying there won't be problems or changes but nitpicking whinging about this case and that doesn't get you to a solution. Brexit is a done deal.

Look at the current state,

Define a desired state without the EU,

consider worst case scenarios but do not let the fear of them rot your brain.

Prepare plans and contingent plans for alternatives

Manage the transition.

The corporations should be able to deal with this in their own business arena. I suspect that many already are. All the government and political press is doing is creating doubt and confusion in the general public.

The multi nationals aren't going to stop selling to the UK and won't stop buying there either. Where there is a market demand will be met. The governments (except in the case of nationalized or highly subsidized businesses) won't have a say in that. The EU want to punish Britain because they are afraid of what other nations may do.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I have no intention of analyzing the UK economy as it is now. That's a job for the UK. I'm not saying there won't be problems or changes but nitpicking whinging about this case and that doesn't get you to a solution. Brexit is a done deal.

It's far from a "done deal" hence the whinging and nitpicking, because there's no fucking clue what to do. You don't want to analyze it, because to do so would be even more embarrassing as you are a US rightwinger channeling the usual anti-Euro bullshit and engaging in the wish fulfillment you guys consider ideology and thought these days. As with everything else you lack to ability, capacity, or desire to perform actual analysis and live in a real world of complex decision making and so crawl back to simple bullshit slogans, the stupidity that produced Brexit.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Gut feelings are just worth that, pigs gut.
Bet you are here to prepare for a Cali exit at home, or Texas exit...

Texas has wanted to 'secdee' for quite some time. I'm quite sure they haven't thought that out clearly.

The RWNJs want to split California into three, as a means of increasing GOP representation in Senate and Congress, since they're outnumbered by the Democrats. It's a form of gerrymandering, which the GOP has increasingly relied on to prop up their dying numbers.